"Mass doesn't change with speed" DEBUNKED is a rebuttal of a posted theory that, within Einstein Relativity, time transformation is self consistent, but inertial mass transformation is invalid.
According to Einstein Relativity, an observer can only use measuring instruments which are stationary with respect to said observer, to avoid the instruments themselves suffering transformation. An observer especially cannot rely upon instruments inhabiting the relatively moving subject of the observation.
Nearly a century ago, the famous twin paradox was claimed solved by the publication of General Relativity; the one who has enjoyed real acceleration being priviledged to have the benefits of slowed time, contracted length, and increased inertial mass resulting from transformation resulting from relative velocity. The stationary observer has to make do without transformed time, space, or mass.
Angular momentum is a function of mass and its velocity in a spinning object. That means that there are other terms in the equation but we can neglect them and still effectively make a point. A specific particle in a flywheel has a velocity which exactly depends on flywheel RPM. A flywheel spinning at N RPM will have an angular momentum as a function of m X N RPM. If the same flywheel spins at 2N RPM the momentum depends on m X 2N. Spin it at N/2 RPM and the momentum depends on m X N/2.
A flywheel has been weighed on the laboratory scales. It has been mounted in frictionless clipped nanotube bearings and enclosed in a bell jar jam packed full of highest grade hard vacuum. In its frictionless environment we can spin it up to any certain RPM and use it in a lengthy science experiment without expecting it to lose any measureable RPM.
The flywheel is spun up to N RPM according to the laboratory clock. Then it is placed in Einstein's famous rocket and a twin is engaged to fly it past the laboratory at .866c. Special Relativity time dilation predicts that an observer in the laboratory can look through binoculars and time the flywheel at N/2 rpm according to the laboratory clock. And General Relativity predicts that the moving twin and flywheel are unilaterally suffering slowed time.
The laboratory observer realizes that when the moving flywheel displays half its original RPM it is also displaying half its original angular momentum. The observer quakes at the anticipation of publishing the experiment and having to admit that he was the one who killed conservation of momentum. If only there was a way to cook the books and finagle the momentum so that when time gets smaller, inertial mass gets bigger. But the Nobel in Physics has just been awarded to great master debater and its gang of Four Stoogi who mathematically proved that time is transrformed, but inertial mass is not, in Special Relativity.
But if....if inertial mass were increased by GAMMA synergistically as time were decreased by GAMMA, then momentum could still be conserved.
Oh well, abolishing conservation of momentum is a small price to pay for making a beautifully neat miniscule change to Relativity math.
According to Einstein Relativity, an observer can only use measuring instruments which are stationary with respect to said observer, to avoid the instruments themselves suffering transformation. An observer especially cannot rely upon instruments inhabiting the relatively moving subject of the observation.
Nearly a century ago, the famous twin paradox was claimed solved by the publication of General Relativity; the one who has enjoyed real acceleration being priviledged to have the benefits of slowed time, contracted length, and increased inertial mass resulting from transformation resulting from relative velocity. The stationary observer has to make do without transformed time, space, or mass.
Angular momentum is a function of mass and its velocity in a spinning object. That means that there are other terms in the equation but we can neglect them and still effectively make a point. A specific particle in a flywheel has a velocity which exactly depends on flywheel RPM. A flywheel spinning at N RPM will have an angular momentum as a function of m X N RPM. If the same flywheel spins at 2N RPM the momentum depends on m X 2N. Spin it at N/2 RPM and the momentum depends on m X N/2.
A flywheel has been weighed on the laboratory scales. It has been mounted in frictionless clipped nanotube bearings and enclosed in a bell jar jam packed full of highest grade hard vacuum. In its frictionless environment we can spin it up to any certain RPM and use it in a lengthy science experiment without expecting it to lose any measureable RPM.
The flywheel is spun up to N RPM according to the laboratory clock. Then it is placed in Einstein's famous rocket and a twin is engaged to fly it past the laboratory at .866c. Special Relativity time dilation predicts that an observer in the laboratory can look through binoculars and time the flywheel at N/2 rpm according to the laboratory clock. And General Relativity predicts that the moving twin and flywheel are unilaterally suffering slowed time.
The laboratory observer realizes that when the moving flywheel displays half its original RPM it is also displaying half its original angular momentum. The observer quakes at the anticipation of publishing the experiment and having to admit that he was the one who killed conservation of momentum. If only there was a way to cook the books and finagle the momentum so that when time gets smaller, inertial mass gets bigger. But the Nobel in Physics has just been awarded to great master debater and its gang of Four Stoogi who mathematically proved that time is transrformed, but inertial mass is not, in Special Relativity.
But if....if inertial mass were increased by GAMMA synergistically as time were decreased by GAMMA, then momentum could still be conserved.
Oh well, abolishing conservation of momentum is a small price to pay for making a beautifully neat miniscule change to Relativity math.